Gary Peel has asked U.S. District Judge William Stiehl to continue his sentencing that is slated for June 25.

In a motion filed in federal court June 6, Chief Federal Public Defender Phillip Kavanaugh asked Stiehl to delay the sentencing for at least 30 days so that he can file objections to the presentence investigation report (PSR) that was filed on May 21.

According to Kavanaugh, Rule 32(f) of the federal rules of criminal procedure requires that any objections to a PSR must be made within 14 days of receiving the report.

Kavanaugh informed Stiehl that he intends to file written objections to the PSR, and has talked to Peel regarding the exact nature of those anticipated objections.

"Given the complexity of some of the issues involved in anticipated objections to the PSR, the presumptive deadline of Rule 32(f) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure has been insufficient for adequate preparation of Defendant Peel's objections to the PSR," Kavanaugh wrote.

"This request for an extension of time in which to file Defendant Peel's objections to the PSR is not made for purposes of undue delay," he added. "To the contrary, it is anticipated that an extension of time will allow those objections to contain a greater degree of specificity and will thus promote judicial economy."

Kavanaugh said since the U.S. Probation Office and the U.S. Attorney's Office would need to respond to his objections, a continuance of approximately 30 days would permit ample time for their responses.

Peel was convicted on March 23 by a federal jury on charges of bankruptcy fraud, obstruction of justice and possession of child pornography.

Peel is being held in detention at the Clinton County jail until his sentencing at the Melvin Price Courthouse in East St. Louis. He faces up to 40 years in prison and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.

Peel has also recently asked Stiehl for a new trial claiming that improper jury instructions were given, evidence that would have allowed him a complete defense was prevented, the government was allowed to present incompetent testimony and evidence that should have been excluded was allowed.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Kevin Burke responded claiming Peel's motion "is utterly lacking in foundation" and opposes any request for a new trial.